Comment of the day

@Uan looks back on one of last year’s biggest controversies, nine months later:

1. Many felt that Vettel stabbed himself in the foot by alienating Webber and that he could end up ruining his chances for the drivers’ championship. The ‘Vettel may need Webber?óÔéŒÔäós help, but he won?óÔéŒÔäót get it’ meme. Never came close to happening.

2. Rosberg?óÔéŒÔäós reaction to the team order. Either follow the team order or don?óÔéŒÔäót, but he was incredibly immature in ‘demonstrating’ that he was faster than Hamilton (even when Brawn came on and told him to back off). Then his quip to the effect of “remember this”. It?óÔéŒÔäós in the same category of quips that Webber?óÔéŒÔäós “not bad for a number two” was. It sounds all puffed up, but a real number 1 driver doesn?óÔéŒÔäót make those quips. Rosberg became a number two driver at that moment. As did Webber. (or more likely they already were, but those actions/quips gave the insight into the psychology/mindset of where they are.)@Uan

Happy birthday!

On this day in F1

Seventies privateer racer Mike Beuttler died 25 years ago today.

His first year in F1, driving a March, was distinguished only by his disqualification from the German Grand Prix for taking the wrong route into the pits – a rule Jo Siffert also fell foul of at the same event.

He plugged on gamely with his March for two more seasons but was unable to break into the points-paying positions, which was no surprise given the difficulties March’s works drivers faced at the time. Beuttler quit racing in 1974.

60 comments on Vettel deserves his success – Massa

I feel the CotD is a bit harsh on rosberg. Being a number one driver doesn’t equate to disobeying team orders, the majority of the time the number one driver will make his way ahead, but if he’s behind and the team ask him to stay there it shows a maturity (albeit Rosberg demonstrating that wekeans the argument)

I feel the CotD is a false true @Uan, but it’s a valid opinion as in fact every premise is plausible.

The result of those premises is in may opinion not true because Rosberg and Webber were always nÂș2 drivers, the quips only show that they already knew deep down they would be in such situations that’s why the quips occur in spite of what their respective team directors told them both sought Vettel and Hamilton respectively as their new drivers they didn’t entrust their former leader and both teams also wanted a new marketing figure either way it was always going to work out better for the new drivers than the current as a football team that signs a new striker or a goalie, the only difference is that they sack the manager afterwards and not the players or who bought them.

Another thing I don’t agree with the cotd is that the one occasion of Malaysia that isn’t very representative in the Mercedes case because I believe Mercedes didn’t allow Rosberg through because they took the situation as their own mistake rather than a set strategy or agreement and in my view the Red Bull situation was representative as in the afterwards the way it was dealt with, the rest was to a degree a misunderstanding and it relayed on a perceived back stabbing move as telemetry further proved Webber was running the car on savings mode as he was commanded where Vettel wasn’t.

The fact both RBR and Mercedes sought new leaders is the perennial fact here, having your team on your back is the ultimate weapon and Vettel won the team’s faith in 09 and won their trust in 10 after that Webber should have left if he wanted a shot to the championships if not he was like Jenson Button when he was paired with Hamilton who acknowledge that he was their to win races and that was his goal. Red bull was never going to compromise Vettel for Webber, having the same equipment is all they can offer even if the car is an “s” and Mark is an “xl”, nevertheless having Vettel as RBR #1 driver is the right decision, inflated by several factors but arguably 4x times true.

What it stands out in Malaysia is that Rosberg is more mature than Vettel but mature won’t win championships and that’s is where our comments meet, Vettel has everything figured out form his retirement in Korea 2010 all of the 2011 season from bahrain 2012 onwards and from Hungary 2013 onwards, better was impossible.

2. Rosbergâs reaction to the team order. Either follow the team order or donât, but he was incredibly immature in âdemonstratingâ that he was faster than Hamilton (even when Brawn came on and told him to back off). Then his quip to the effect of âremember thisâ. Itâs in the same category of quips that Webberâs ânot bad for a number twoâ was. It sounds all puffed up, but a real number 1 driver doesnât make those quips. Rosberg became a number two driver at that moment. As did Webber. (or more likely they already were, but those actions/quips gave the insight into the psychology/mindset of where they are.)

1. I’m not sure how someone could claim that Rosberg was immature when he was “demonstrating” his speed over Lewis in Malaysia, and then defend Vettel’s actions in the same race.

2. Did Rosberg really become official #2 driver in that race? Now that’s a little early to judge, especially considering that Rosberg throughout 2013 looked much better against Hamilton than Webber ever did against Vettel. Nico lost to Lewis in the end by only a mere 18 points – despite having 3 retirements versus Lewis’ one.

In a word, no. And there still isn’t a clear no.1 at Mercedes. There will be at the end of the ’14 season though.
While one can view Rosberg’s actions as being “weak”, especially when compared to Vettel’s, I thought it was a very smart move.

If he had disobeyed Ross, he would have looked petulant and over-competitive trying to prove his worth right after a big name had moved to the team. His obeying team orders, he came across as a measured driver who respects the team, and was thinking about the team result. Their second best result in F1 I do believe (possibly third, not going to check). Eitherway, he actually gained my respect by obeying orders. So did Seb, but they aren’t that comparable. A triple world champion is a winner through andf through, end of. Rosberg/Merc were in a “oh we’re now front runners, lets consolidate points” frame of mind.

Vettel pitted too early and lost the lead. He then caught up to Webber and was told to stay behind with the promise he would get his chance later in the race. Later in the race he went for that chance and the team told him to back off again. Surprise, suprise, Vettel didn’t listen.

And Webber, being the hypocrit he is, critised Vettel for doing the exact same thing he would’ve done and has done before.

And no, Rosberg wasn’t being immature. He was being sensible. The team wasn’t. They were in 3rd and 4th so it made no difference if Rosberg had been allowed through except that Rosberg had a lot more fuel/pace and might have challenged the Red Bulls. Hamilton was in no position to do so.

So Felipe has finally begun with the “Let’s **** Fernando off” comments, after all the “He’s better than Schumacher was, I would know” knob-polishing. Good to hear that.

Nico was spot on with his actions in Malaysia. He
– still complied with the order, avoiding starting with a really bad foot in an early phase of the season, and shifting mood in the team towards Lewis.
– clearly made the case that he was faster and the result was merely the outcome of the team order. If the fans, the press, and Lewis himself thought for a lap that it would be a formality for Lewis to step as the team leader (remember the winter comments? Go read that.), that was gone instantly. That was instrumental in pressuring Lewis for the rest of the season, which too often than not doesn’t handle it well.

Where does it say he does not think that Fernando IS better than Michael, exactly because he can do something like that (take the win in Singapore 2008) and keep it silent and be fine with it @stefanauss?

Good then that I didn’t say that “there goes the 2014 title favourite position for Lewis”!

Lewis himself said on the F1 BBC recap shown earlier today that he should have just let Nico go and not repassed him down the front stretch, and it would have ended that scuffle immediately, with Rosberg getting closer to the Red Bulls. But, there was a big payback for Nico at Silverstone when Lewis’ win fell into Rosberg’s hands instead, Lewis recovering to 4th. Lewis was also unlucky to lose 2nd at Monaco (silly SC rules/coasting too long) to Vettel.

So, for Lewis to win in 2014, he will need luck on his side instead of team orders. Lewis may have more consistent pace than Rosberg, but Rosberg may be better at consistently bringing the car home, which could matter a great deal in 2014, along with Lewis having input into the new car instead of Schumi (which could go either way, but probably better suited to Lewis’s personal likes).

Having said that it doesn’t specifically, in a gramatically perfect way, say that Lewis was not invovled (i.e. Lewis could’ve recorded something for someone he neither knew nor had met), but I think the message is pretty clear.

Problem is, even if one sees his tweet one doesnÂŽt neccessarily believe it. Obviously the song makes for bad press and bad pr, if it had been received more positively maybe Lewis would have stood to it.

I thought Vettel’s actions in Malaysia consolidated his status as a person designed to win. There was no unsportsmanlike behavior beyond his disobedience, it was simply a case of “I was faster. I passed him. I won.” I admire that in a driver – an uncompromising will to win, provided it is within the confines of sporting integrity. Crashing is unacceptable and something I don’t hold Senna in a great light for, nor Prost.

Rosberg’s on the other hand looked to me like someone who was too willing to be consigned to the number two role, which he can’t afford to do if he wants to stand a chance of beating Hamilton next year and projecting himself firmly into the limelight. So, if ever a similar situation were to surface next year, prove you are faster Nico and pass him. Don’t submit, but don’t crash.

That is not a virtue. It’s probably the furthest thing from a virtue. I don’t know if you’ve ever actually seen someone driven by that “uncompromising will”, but I have – and they are rarely good people. They can justify almost anything, and have no morality to guide them. They are rarely able to think about how the consequences of their actions might affect others, and when they do, they frequently assume that those others will not care about it because they are driven by the same unwillingness to compromise.

Vettel’s actions may have seemed harmless in Malaysia, and maybe justified as something that any racing driver would do, but they speak a lot to his character – I think he is someone who would be capable of things that might be considered very cruel indeed.

@vettel1
I think Rosberg, in this case, did the right thing. Sometimes in life you need to know when to back off and Rosberg did just that. That decision to obey was for the team, and or his relationship with his boss, team mate, etc That is important and teams’ sports. That takes guts and to say this is sign he was willing to be consigned to the number two role is a bit too harsh.
Vettel on the other hand ignored communication, team wishes and relationships just to win a race. One race. He clearly didn’t think properly otherwise he wouldn’t use so many regrettable remarks after the race. His attitude two weeks later where just cold and from a guy who has problems with his team mate. I don’t think Vettel will/would do the same to Ricardo if asked not to pass.
Sportsmanlike? Not in my opinion, but, I understand there were issues between the two drivers.
That is most certainly why he did what he did.

Vettel was at the time a 3 x Champion vs. Webbers zero and some of the previous years had the championship decided by margins often smaller than the 7 points Vettel took. He did the only right thing and the Team couldn’t see what was best for them, i.e. acting irrational because of fear of a crash taking out both of them. I only wished that he had been loyal to his real feeling right after the race and arrogantly shrugged of all critics by stating this fact and stating his natural right in the team as the Champion to take the win – even from his team mate – if he could. And I’m absolutely sure he will do exactly the same to Ricciardo if the same situation comes up, but I think the team has learned to shut up, i.e. not ask Vettel to back off.

The real fools in that incident were the team bosses @palle. And that is something that will hurt the team in the longer run, because its pretty clear that Vettel does not need to respect Horner, even if he does respect Mateschitz, Newey and possibly Marko.

wow, COTD. Thanks @keithcollantine, though I’m a little surprised. As the first poster stated, it was a bit harsh, though I stand by it. Drivers and cars are so closely matched that I think it is the interplay of psychology, emotions, will and mental strength of the individual drivers that separates one from the other over a race weekend, in the races themselves and across the season. For me, along with how teams develop their cars during the season, it’s watching how the drivers handle the pressures they face that makes F1 what it is and gives the sport more relevance to the real world than just being another bit of weekend entertainment.

Hmmm…if it’s about more than a bit of weekend entertainment, and is about how drivers handle the pressures over a season, which I agree with, then why in your COTD did you condemn both NR and MW to being number 2’s after one race? In the case of RBR, the order was actually to favour MW. How does that designate him as number 2? Just because SV decided to ‘heroically and like a true Champion’ pass someone who had been instructed to finish the race with his metaphorical pants at his knees?

I personally did not think SV harmed his chances of getting help from MW later on, and I prefer my WDC’s to not want or need the help.

I personally disagree that NR automatically became a number 2, and I am quite confident he did enough vs. LH to confirm what he showed with MS as a teammate…NR is not phased by having WDCs as teammates, but rather seems invigorated by it.

I’m not condemning Rosberg or Webber. The quip Webber made was from 2010 after his Silverstone win. The whole front wing issue was blown out of proportion with Flavio whispering in Webber’s ear. Webber was playing mind games around the wing, which he didn’t like anyway – and the reason for playing it was that he thought he’d be made a number 2 driver-but ultimately it’s own results that would do that for him and his own mindset, not anything the team did.

If you watch later in the season, he was odds on favorite for the WDC, yet crashed out in the rain in Korea, then whined a bit about not getting “number 1″ status in Brazil, then totally succumbed to the pressure in Abu Dhabi, with a horrible qualifying effort, and a poor race. Do you recall the number one story leading into Abu Dhabi? It was “would Vettel move over and gift Webber the win if they were running 1 and 2″. Think about that a moment. The man who was in the driver’s seat to win the WDC was not even considered capable of winning the race. Yet Vettel was?

Webber’s focus was more on his “place” within the team and how he was being treated, rather than taking the reins and responsibility on himself (which Vettel was doing). A true number 1 driver, especially in a team capable of winning the championship, just doesn’t do that. Think Alonso, Hamilton, Schumacher, Senna, Prost, etc. and put them in the RB6 in 2010 in Webber’s position with 3 or 2 or even 1 race to go, and each one of them more than likely closes the deal.

I like Webber and think he’s an outstanding driver, but he has two weaknesses. His starts and his own head. I’m not even talking about them as being huge weaknesses, but at the level of F1, it’s enough to separate the top echelon from the rest.

As for Rosberg, again, we are talking about insight into his psyche. He was faster than Lewis and should have been allowed pass him in Malaysia. But he was ordered to drop back. He knew he was faster, the team knew it too, so what does he do? Keeps moving up right behind Lewis to show the team he was faster. Over and again. So that Brawn had to come on the radio to tell him to back down, and he never really did. Then his comment “remember this”. It’s a variation of “you owe me”. A driver that is capable of being a true WDC contender doesn’t have the mentality of someone “owing” him anything, certainly not results. A champion calibre driver wants a fast car and then to leave everything else to him.

So Rosberg in Malaysia gave us the insight to see that he’s not at that level. It’s no shame. How many champions have their been in F1? 32? What separates them from the rest isn’t just skill, because at this level, all the drivers – even a Chilton – have skills. It’s the mental aspect. It’s their psychological strength. Drivers like Vettel, Alonso, MSC, Senna et al, are at a different level than a Rosberg or Webber. And it’s races and quips like Silverstone 2010 and Malaysia 2013 that let us peer behind the veil and see it clearly.

I also truly believe that Webbers apparent disobedience at Silverstone was no more than a bravado demonstration of his superior speed at that point of the race, similar to Rosbergs, remember Webber was on a year to year contract and after the Turkey fiasco it was clear he would get the blame for any incident between himself and Vettel.

my comment re Rosberg and Webber were in the nature of their personalities, did/do they have what it takes to be the number 1 driver at a top team? I don’t think they do. But it’s not a black or white, all or nothing judgement. It doesn’t mean they aren’t talented or capable of being solid team members at a top team, or that they can’t win races – which clearly both can.

As for Senna or MSC or Alonso, well there are plenty F1 experts out there who far exceed my own knowledge and experience that would put those 3 in the top 5 of all time drivers (perhaps top 10 for Alonso). It’s fair game to question some of their more questionable/less proud moments. But I seriously doubt they would have done or said what Rosberg did.

As for Webber’s disobedience at Silverstone, that was in 2011, not 2010 when he actually won the race. In 2011 he was told to hold position and he himself said that he ignored that team order – he didn’t say he could have, but chose not to.

I think I can buy into your take on MW a little, while at the same time I’m not entirely sure everything was in his hands to affect on the team, such has seemed their desire for SV to succeed. When MW had his last best chance to win the WDC I think I recall Horner saying he could envision MW winning it and then retiring and then the team would be SV’s. MW didn’t win it, nor retire, but stayed on obviously.

And you may end up right about NR, but I find your case weak using Malaysia as an example. I think it could just as easily be argued that NR’s insistence on shadowing LH was as much to feed the ego of a potential WDC level driver with an insatiable appetite to show the world and his team that he isn’t taking a back seat to a WDC other than by instruction, but certainly not by lack of performance on the track. He didn’t take a back seat to MS for 3 years…he certainly isn’t going to take one to LH either…and certainly wasn’t going to before LH had one race under his belt at Merc, without making his point about the order.

It’s amazing to think that during a period of stable regulations, McLaren went from having arguably the best car in 2012 to a 2013 car which was less successful than the cut-and-shut, Mansell-sized mess they produced in 1995.

@jackisthestig – McLaren’s reasoning for the major changes was pretty sound. They felt they had developed the MP4-27 to its limit, and that if they continued with it, they would exhaust any remaining development pretty quickly. But I think Martin Whitmarsh is right: they bit off more than they could chew, and got fixated on short-term problems to the point where they lost sight of the big picture. It’s an encouraging sign, because it shows that they have a capacity for self-awareness that allows them to honestly assess themselves – unlike Ferrari, who have been plagued by the same problems for two years now, but have resorted to Luca di Montezemolo spitting venom at every aspect of the sport.

It was arguably their least competitive car for about 30 years, if not more, in terms of raw results. The last time that McLaren failed to make it onto the podium at least once in a season was in 1980, whilst the last time that McLaren finished outside of the top four in the WCC would be 2004 (where they also finished in 5th place).
It could be argued that finishing in 5th was slightly flattering too – had the mid season tyre change not disrupted Force India and slightly favoured McLaren, they might have been down in 6th place.

I can see where @Uan is coming from in his COTD, re Rosberg. However, this term of #1 and #2 driver is bandied about a lot. I think its more along the lines of “he/she who claims the prize vs he/she who expects the prize”. If you want to get ahead in the world, whether its driving an F1 car, or working on a farm, if you don’t try to get ahead at every opportunity, there will be someone else who will be.

2. Rosbergâs reaction to the team order. Either follow the team order or donât, but he was incredibly immature in âdemonstratingâ that he was faster than Hamilton (even when Brawn came on and told him to back off). Then his quip to the effect of âremember thisâ. Itâs in the same category of quips that Webberâs ânot bad for a number twoâ was. It sounds all puffed up, but a real number 1 driver doesnât make those quips. Rosberg became a number two driver at that moment. As did Webber. (or more likely they already were, but those actions/quips gave the insight into the psychology/mindset of where they are.)

Couldn’t disagree more. In my opinion, Hamilton and Rosberg raced each other until the last ten laps or so, and it turned out Hamilton was ahead at that point. Then Ross Brawn decided there was no point in racing anymore and he asked his drivers to hold station. I personally think he should have let his drives race – clearly Rosberg felt the same.

Nonetheless Brawn asked Rosberg to hold station. And so he did. That has absolutely nothing to do with accepting a number two status, that is merely an employee respecting the decisions his boss makes. I gained huge amounts of respect for Nico Rosberg during that race, and also for Hamilton for admitting Rosberg should have been on the podium.

If Rosberg would have Vetteled it, the relationship between teammates at Mercedes would have been just as bad as at Red Bull. Hamilton would have felt the need for payback, so he might have lunged down Rosberg’s inside at Monaco, resulting in a crash. Instead they kept on respecting each other, which I certainly appreciate more.

Fascinating, I lost a lot of respect for Rosberg that day because he couldn’t figure out that passing in the second DRS zone was probably a better idea, and I don’t want to see the faster driver/the one who had managed the race better sat behind the slower driver. Similarly, I lost a lot of respect for Webber (perhaps even more than Rosberg) for how he behaved after the race. There’s no use complaining that it should’ve been your win, because if it was, you would’ve won it. Since Webber didn’t, it wasn’t. I disliked how he played the victim after Malaysia. The biggest mistake that day was RBR’s team orders.

The comment of the day makes no sense whatsoever, Nico was faster than Lewis so he asked Ross Brawn for permission to overtake, Brawn said no and Nico followed this, yet that is somehow immature? Perhaps if Vettel and Webber had come together then one Red Bull retired whilst the other was damaged, Nico wouldn’t be able to take advantage as he would be so far behind due to staying at Hamilton’s pace, meaning Webber or Vettel could nurse a damaged car to the finish to win, obviously this is just a made up scenario but it very easily could have happened and had it happened then Brawn’s team orders would have been ridiculed then we would all be saying Rosberg was right, so I don’t see how Rosberg asking to pass a much slower car is by any stretch of the imagination ‘immature’.

To ask permission isn’t very Championish. Would Schumacher or Senna have asked permission to overtake their team mate?
Very often people argue that the Pitwall with all their data are wiser than the drivers on track, but all of these team-orders are infested with fear – fear of an interteam driver collision, fear of tyres falling off at the end, fear of crash, fear of off-track moments causing loss of position. The tension and anxiety at the pitwall is immense – just look at Horners foot movements. When the race is on, the pitwall should know their place and function in the whole scenery – they advice the driver, while he is racing. Let him go to race freely – if their preparation of the drivers re tactics and situations have been succesfull, then it won’t be a problem.

I do think that both Schumacher and Senna actually would have asked if they would have found themselves in a situation like that. Briatore and Ross in Schumi’s case and Ron Dennis in Senna’s (nor Frank Williams) case are not the kind of bosses that would accept their drivers ignoring such an order (for Schumi just look at 1999 where he had to help Irvine).

That Senna and Prost came together several times was not because they ignored team orders, but because Dennis had told them to race it on track.

Thanks for mentioning Mike Beuttler, the only known gay driver in the history of F1.

I would like to add that Beuttler was a talented driver, who won several races in Formula 3 and Formula 2 against James Hunt and several other drivers, who would later go to F1. His nickname was âBlockerâ because he used to close the door on the overtaking driver.

Beuttlerâs F1 career never really came off as he didnât manage to score a point in his 28 GP appearances. His financial support came from several London stockbrokers so the 1973-74 stock market crash put an end to his career.